Full Judgment
2. The appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) demanding duty on the goods manufactured by the appellant on the ground that they were not entitled to the exemption contained in notification 203/92 for the reason that modvat credit had been availed of in the manufacture of the exported goods.
3. The copy of the licence under which the goods were imported,which has been produced in the appeal, indicates as limiting factors both value and quantity. The licence appears thus to be a quantity based licence. This is confirmed by the fact that DEEC book issued with the licence clarifies that the goods that they may be imported under it are entitled to the benefit of notification 204/92. This notification does not contain any condition relating to availing of modvat credit.
4. We had adjourned the matter on the last occasion for production of a legible copy of the bill of entry under which the goods were cleared, in order to see, whether the notification that was claimed and granted was notification 203/92 or 204/92. This was necessary because it was contended in the appeal that the exemption under notification 203/92 had been availed of. A legible copy of the bill of entry so far has not bene produced. If that had been produced, we would have decided the appeal itself. As this stands now, it will be necessary to verify the legible copies of the documents.
5. Accordingly, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order.
The Commissioner shall examine from his records, and from such records that the appellant may produce before him within two months from the receipt of this order, which was the notification that has been availed and thereafter proceed to adjudicate on the notice in accordance with law.